USPTO serial 78485448
AFFIRMED
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MANDIR, FREDERICK
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with AFFIRMED?
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
BAL HARBOUR, FL
BAL HARBOUR, FL
Wolfson, Louis E. and Wolfson, Patrice J.,
Old Westbury, NY
Other trademarks owned by Wolfson, Louis E. and Wolfson, Patrice J.,
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Shelly L. McGee
Shelly L. McGee HOGAN & HARTSON LLP8300 Greensboro DriveSuite 1100McLean, VA 22102Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 024 | Blanket throws; bed blankets; towels | ACTIVE | — |
Related trademarks
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
- Other trademarks owned by AFFIRMED ENTERPRISES, LLC
- Other trademarks owned by AFFIRMED ENTERPRISES, LLC
- Other trademarks owned by Wolfson, Louis E. and Wolfson, Patrice J.,
- Other trademarks in Class 024
- Similar marks named AFFIRMED
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 7, 2008 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Aug 7, 2008 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Sep 24, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 4, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 4, 2007 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Mar 6, 2007 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Dec 12, 2006 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Nov 22, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 24, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 20, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 19, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 19, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 19, 2006 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 19, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 19, 2006 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Oct 19, 2006 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Oct 19, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 19, 2005 | GRML | CORRESPONDENCE E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 19, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 18, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 6, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 6, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 6, 2005 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Apr 6, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Apr 5, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 23, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |